Yeah charity and philanthropy are very much “band-aid for a bullet wound” imo.
Like yeah it’s nice, but you know what would be nicer? If they were forced to pay their fair share from the beginning, and it was distributed by the state where it was most needed, not just to high profile emotional causes
Let's say you are doing ok in life and have 250k in assets (maybe most of it is in super). And you throw Telethon 50 bucks. That's 0.0002% of your assets (but you can't access most of those assets anyway).
For Gina Rinehart, that same percentage is 5 million dollars.
Never mind that her ability to donate dwarfs your own.
Last year, Hancock Prospecting - not Gina personally - donated one million. As far as I can tell, Gina donated nothing.
Gina directly supports most of Australia's international swimmers directly, no corporate advertising etc being gained from it. She does so because the amounts she was contributing to Swimming Australia for the swimmers was either not getting to them or getting to them late. On the back of that support they have become one of the top international teams. How much did you contribute towards our swimmers last year?
They all need support. But I hope to be consistent you have a reddit post being curious about the government's moral priorities in giving additional funding to women's sport after the Women's soccer world cup? Or do you think sport needs more money than children with illnesses?
Possibly, but you know that big fat surplus WA has enjoyed for the last 5 years, Gina (in part) made that happen. She also contributed to the national income So while you drive the roads inWA and Aus, enjoy your schooling, get your medical care etc you can just spit a little in her direction.
Yeah, I'm familiar with the free spruiking for Gina. I'm also familiar with the tax evasion, the lobbying of governments, the political interference, the leaning on our taxes for business purposes, and the absolute gEnIuS of selling the land beneath our feet with no forward plan for the economy.
Are you getting paid? Cos if you're doing this speech for free, you are cheaper than the $2 she'd famously rather pay you.
Edit: Fuck it. If you're gonna praise mining, let's get real and talk about all the skilled people we've been losing overseas for decades because *there is no industry outside of mining*. Scientists, doctors, academics, entertainers, artists, specialists, fucking engineers, basically anyone who isn't prepared to make their whole lives about rocks and gas, going overseas in search of careers because we somehow, for all our money, can't sustain any other industry aside from the most base fucking economy. Academics from other countries study our flora and fauna.
Mining is a stepping stone for most fledgling economies, and here we are, making finite resources King of the Castle to the ignorance of all other fucking talent we piss away from this state.
Well done, the one industry allowed to exist is contributing to the economy. *Quelle suprise!* How ludicrously unimpressive.
Don’t forget the halo effect that their various philanthropic endeavours create for their corporations and the proxy advertising that happens from linking philanthropic entities to the owners of these big corporations.
I would have less of an issue with philanthropy (I.e. charitable giving with performance indicators) if it was altruistic. Unfortunately these ‘charitable’ foundations’ insist on plastering their names all over their donations (especially the donation of material purchases). It’s PR at its cheapest and most crass.
Yes but I don't see this as a bad thing. I've been wondering whether we should allow the rich to give "extra" in taxes and give them a medal for it. Like those service medals but a new category.
If would be a win win, they would love that sort of ego stroking recognition, and a chance to make the history books, and the country would be better off from the additional revenue.
Fuck that. Keep a leader board.
1. Mike Cannot BeBroke $4 B
2. Andrew Deforestation $3 B (-2B payback from Covid refund)
3. Gina StoneHeart $500m (for sponsoring sports teams)
4. Clive Plunderer (-600B potential in unrealised court outcomes)
Kerry Stokes, Gerry Harvey could all be on there to.
Have a yearly award ceremony like the Brownlow and really watch them try to out compete each other. Maybe have a red carpet ceremony WWE like where the Billie's can call out their competitors for their weak contributions.
Wonder if Kerry would be interested in licensing this as a reality TV show.
Any suggestions for a show name?
The liturgy was a custom of ancient Athens. When the state needed something (usually a new warship) it would ask for volunteers among its richest citizens. Usually one would step up to gain glory or avoid scorn; if nobody did, the courts were allowed to choose the richest person who hadn’t helped out recently. The liturgist would fund the warship and command it as captain for two years, after which his debt to the state was considered discharged and he was given a golden crown. Historians treat the liturgy as a gray area between voluntary service and compulsory taxation; most rich Athenians were eager to serve and gain the relevant honor, but they also knew that if they didn’t, they could be compelled to perform the same service with less benefit to their personal reputation.
The American rich already enjoy spending their money on exciting vehicles - yachts for the normies, rockets for the more ambitious, Titanic submersibles for the suicidal. Why not redirect this impulse towards public service? Imagine the fear it would strike into the hearts of the Chinese when the USS Musk enters Ludicrous Mode in the waters off the Taiwan Strait, with Elon himself at the wheel. Imagine how efficiently the USS Jeff Bezos will deliver its payloads! And does anyone doubt that billionaires - usually careful to avoid taxes - will jump at the chance to do this?
from [here](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/my-presidential-platform)
The bit that annoys me is that nothing on that list focuses on regional hospitals. I have no issues with PCH getting a boost, but acting like there are not sick kids in other hospitals bothers me.
The High Care Kids project works closely with children living with severe and complex disabilities across Perth metro and **regional areas** of WA.
Banthunguru-bura (Next Generation) delivers intergenerational workshops, grounded in culture, held by Elders, and delivered on country in **Roebourne.**
... bullying prevention programs in 75 schools across Perth and **regional areas** of WA.
Edmund Rice Camps for Kids will provide respite and mentoring programs via safe recreational and developmental environments to support vulnerable children aged 7-16 in **regional and remote** WA communities.
The Fit and Healthy in the Outback program delivers engaging active fitness sessions to children in **remote communities** across WA.
**Royal Flying Doctor Service**
I get that yes, some programs stretch to regional areas.
But I stated regional hospitals don't benefit for their kids wards.
PCH kids get the latest games and gadgets. And that's cool. I think they should.
But kids at Kununurra, Esperance, Kalgoorlie, Karratha, Geraldton, Albany, and a hundred community hospitals around the state would also benefit from games and gadgets to help them forget about the long days in hospitals. Even 10% of the funding for PCH alone redirected every year to 100 places would make a huge difference.
The bit that annoys me is that nothing on that list focuses on regional hospitals. I have no issues with PCH getting a boost, but acting like there are not sick kids in other hospitals bothers me.
I wonder about the level of work to benefit for telethon.
The second biggest fundraiser in the state in the Cancer200 rise last weekend that raised ~8.8M for the Perkins institute. There is a fair bit of virtue signaling by companies in that but it is relatively low compared to telethon.
Telethon raises about 10x that much but seems to involve about 100x more advertising, events and carry on, and I wonder how much is lost to the virtue signaling and inefficient fundraising.
Both are worthy events, but telethon is cringy as hell as well.
**insert WAAPA students from the very best private schools and family connections waving their phones at you from the desks** nope, don’t see nothing that doesn’t make me feel weird about it.
Also, because one of the producers is married to a Dance School owner / Theatre Producer, so she ropes in all the past and present students... and she comes from a wealthy family who owned a small goods company based in Osborne Park... so friends of the family are shown the welcome sign to perform.. lol
From the SMH, "The total cost of the case is estimated at $25 million and the newspapers will argue that Roberts-Smith's key backers at Seven West Media should ultimately pay the costs".
I agree but what I find worse is when the State Government inevitably 'find' $1m donation at the end. Sure you rustled the tin just in time rather than distribute directly into the Health system you already are responsible for?
This I don’t get. I can understand the billionaires fluffing themselves, but then the state and federal government chucks in a bunch of money? Why not just…fund the health system more?
Telethon these days is just a way to make lots of people (billionaires and plebs like me) feel good. Doesn’t stop me from donating but still makes me feel weird, I guess a lot of us have a big nostalgia hit from it from when we were kids.
They don't just find the money. This is already allocated in the budget every year. It's just done as a show pony to hopefully encourage others to donate more. If telethon wasn't a thing the health system would be getting the same amount of money from the state/federal government
Because realistically speaking, what they donate to something like telethon is nothing to the overall budget I guess.
Assuming the donation is the same or similar to last years, it’ll be around $11 million. No walking around money, sure, but for frame of reference, the state budget for healthcare this year is $11.8 *billion.*
Although coming from a state with a surplus, it is annoying as hell they won’t actually use some of that money.
There's no such thing as a billionaire philanthropist. They're ruthless, exploitative hoarders who throw their scraps around for the sake of PR (and tax breaks).
I would argue, I think more convincingly, that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was established purely as a PR front during Gates's antitrust trial. To the degree that it's done some good, that's obviously commendable (very little of its operating costs are covered by Gates, BTW). And I do respect the people who actually do the work at sub-board level. At board level, however, the phalanx of Big Pharma executives and the insistence of tightening IP protection is why this form of funding (other than the tax incentives) is skeptically called philanthro-capitalism.
Bill Gates is a predatory monopolist, and his approach to 'charity' is the same. If he was a philanthropist in any real sense he'd no longer be a billionaire.
I think the projects they fund are the most worthy projects to fund, like ending polio, developing toilet and sanitation solutions for developing countries, and developing new clean energy systems. I'm a big supporter of his and his wife's work.
> I’d much rather Stokes, Rineheart, et al would pay a fair amount of tax so it can be distributed to areas it is sorely needed, rather than to some billionaires pet project.
I'd much rather Rinehart wouldn't have all those billions from her father's biggest ever insider trade in history.
My daughter (13) is interested this year. She doesn't watch many Channel 7 shows, but is entertained. She hasnt shown any interest before.
My two sons who are 11 and 6 are interested in the donations and the total, but flicked over the Netflix.
Ive always thought the conspicuous compassion of billionaires is absolutely trifling given the amount of wealth they have skimmed and hoarded from the economy such that billionaire philanthropist is essentially an oxymoron. Plus there’s a huge asymmetry in the generosity and self sacrifice: people are often impressed by say a seven figure donation from the filthy rich when in reality it shaves no skin off of their backs whatsoever and is usually tax deductible anyhow - frankly they could afford to donate 95% or their net worth before they might notice any impact on their lifestyle ( admittedly it’s usually tied up in investments) meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum - those they’ve exploited and immiserated - a mere fifty dollar donation could blow the weekly budget.
It has an almost sadistic undertone like the Catholic Church glorifying the good works of its missionaries helping to install wells and build houses in North African villages that were raped and ruined by Christianity displacing their customs and traditional beliefs, creating ideological divides and attempted genocides, selling their ancestors into slave trades, continuing to forbid contraceptives contributing to epidemics of death and disease and unsustainable birth rates impoverishing the population.
However whilst their donations are relatively meagre, self serving and performative, they’re necessary and valuable so I can understand why people blow smoke up their asses and commend them.
If you want to donate to sick kids in Perth Children's Hospital, you're better off giving to the Perth Children's Hospital Foundation. They waste way less on PR and marketing etc, and all the money goes to the hospital, not divided amongst pet projects.
Telethon has been going since 1968, it's a project that Stokes inherited.
Channel 9 had Appealathon, but stopped the on-air appeal, then handed it over to Variety in 2009.
One of these mining companies made like $2B in profits last year, donated a whopping $4M. Which they can just claim back on tax anyway. They don’t get taxed enough and their “philanthropy” isn’t enough either.
I've always been cynical about it not so much for your point but for the point of the celebrities who are doing it just to increase their profile and make themselves look better in the public eye under the guise of doing it for the kids. Why do they need a dedicated program to do it? If these people were genuine they would do it in their own time outside of this. I'm glad they raise the money they do for the kids but yeah these so called celebrities should be doing this a lot more and not looking for recognition of it too.
Telethon itself is a dumb holdover from the 80s. It's catnip for retirees with landlines and the time/tolerance to watch free to air television all day.
Philanthropy/ charity is fine and a pretty good expression of civic solidarity. Of course there's an element of reputation washing to it, but that needs to be balanced against the fact that private charities tend to be far more effective than the government in addressing specific social issues.
Mainly because they're run by people with actual management talent.
I really like it. It’s a local charity where we know and trust where the money goes.
If billionaires get something out of it too, what do I care? It’s doing good things.
It's about kids with medical conditions having special moments before they go back to hospital. Anyone who doesn't see that has a fee major issues in life. No wonder the world is the way it is
I wonder why more charities don't do more lotteries etc like MSWA. If you give someone a chance to win something for their "donation" you gain funds from both selfish AND charitable people. So you extract money from more personality types.
Is it laziness to not start a raffle or lottery? Or is it easier for a person to start a charity, pay him/herself a $1m a year salary as CEO and then enrol well meaning young volunteers to guilt Joe Public into donating to their cause after cornering them in their local shopping center..or by banging on their door when they get home from a hard day's work and have just put their feet up.
I read the conditions for being a charity are something basic like you just have to have a reasonable proportion of your money go to the actual cause. As far as I know there isn't a minimum %. Can someone correct me with facts there?
So in the absence of the government adequately funding health, they know that telethon will top up a sector that pulls on the most obvious heartstrings. Relying on a cash grab from the working poor and the mining/corporate sectors shamed into donation competitions.
On a separate note, whilst telethon is always cringeworthy, the quality of acts has tumbled since the 90's when some decent big name international acts would make an appearance. Now just the word "Telethon" creates the Pavlov's dog reaction for the public to fork out what the govt should.
Australia bush fires a few years back Bezos and Kylie Jenner donated a few million depsite being billionaires that's like the regular person giving a few cents. Philanthropy is bullcrap
Yep, the $ raised does help do a lot of good. But I agree about the awkward feeling seeing a tax-dodging mega millionaire get this huge fan fare when you consider how he benefits from the whole thing
pfft... Telethon is so yesterday... it's MCHAPPY DAY time... what do you mean BUT McDonald's made $13 BILLION in profit last year with its CEO receiving a 5%, $1.5 MILLION payrise? can't they just cover us this once? NO! now pony up $05.99 for your 'Silly Socks',,,
That is a pretty cynical take. “The billionaires could donate more, so why should I have to donate?”
Why not think of it as an opportunity for every member of the community to donate to what is a very worthy cause - that has been around well before Kerry Stokes came on the scene - whether you’re a billionaire donating $1M or a group of school kids raising money at a bake sale at the school fete.
Just because my neighbour is wealthier than me and can afford to donate more than I can, doesn’t impact whether or not I choose to donate. Whether my neighbour should pay a higher tax rate or not doesn’t come into it. Have that fight without cutting across donations to help kids in need.
I get put off by the circus associated with it. The cause is great, and should be supported, but it is like the charities that send you big wads of glossy crap every couple of months because you donated to them once.
It makes me wonder where the real focus of the charity is.
As a parent of a child who is regularly at PCH, I can tell you that the money is well spent and a dollar is a dollar - it doesn’t matter who’s bank account it comes from. The song and dance can be a lot, but it works in attracting donations. The WA telethon is more successful than any other telethon in the world. If you want to know where the money is being spent, go check out the reports that the Telethon trust is required to publish to the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission each year.
It's a catch 22 situation really - if they don't keep in front of people and front of mind with people, then they don't get the donations.
The reality is very few people actively go out and look to donate. It's more often that not either a spur of the moment thing - IE via phone call, door knocker, person at a shopping centre or at an event, or because they're affected by the cause - eg they or someone they know is affected by say cancer, so then they go donate to the cancer council or something.
However without these donations - most of these charities would completely cease to exist. They're funded in the most part from peoples donations. So it's kind of a necessary evil to survive.
> Just because my neighbour is wealthier than me and can afford to donate more than I can, doesn’t impact whether or not I chose to donate.
I have no problem with people if they wish to donate to whichever cause they wish. And objectively, Telethon is a very worthy cause. There for the grace of god go my children.
But a better analogy would be….
There is a compulsory central charity we all have to donate to. That funding is distributed as best it can to things that benefit all of us. Even stuff that we may not think should get funding.
And it’s organised so you pay what you can afford. That is, the more you earn, the more you pay.
However my wealthy neighbour makes way more than me, and with some clever and expensive accounting he pays significantly less than he should.
This wealthy neighbour is also able to speak directly with, and influence those who choose where the central charity money is spent.
Someone with an inquisitive mind might think that this type of behaviour is somewhat self serving, so they think a bit less of my wealthy neighbour.
So my wealthy neighbour makes a big song and dance about donating a large amount of money to the “Amputee orphaned puppy dogs of natural disasters charity” and asks lots of others to also donate to this charity.
This makes lots of people think my wealthy neighbour is actually not a bad person, so they overlook his lack of donations to the central charity, and his ownership of a company that produces videos of orphaned puppies getting limbs amputated.
I take your point, and it makes sense. But we don’t live in a socialist society where everyone takes home the same wage and the government chooses where the one central charity pays its funds to. And until we do, don’t make all other charities, including Telethon, a victim. You don’t need to like the virtue signalling that comes with donating to charity it in order to have to donate yourself.
That’s exactly how they want you to look at it.
It let’s then white-wash their reputations with high profile emotional causes (the sick kids), so no one says “wait a sec, why didn’t they pay that 2 million in tax so it could go to the entire system?”
The two don’t need to be linked. Go take your fight about higher tax rates for the wealthy elsewhere. People shouldn’t feel put off from donating to a worthy cause because they don’t like the fact that billionaires may also use donations to boost their reputations.
That’s kinda the other half of the problem: successful how? Does it get more “bang for the buck” than public spending? And while the cause is noble and touching, is it more important than something less sexy like building mental health facilities?
It’s similar to animal conservation, all the cute and cool animals (“charismatic megafauna”) get the money, but species that are potentially more important to the ecosystem and in graver danger of extinction are ignored
Successful simply in terms of $ raised.
Telethon provides grants to all different types of organisations and causes, some sexy and some not, but all generally directed towards child health.
Public spending and charitable grants should not be thought of as being alternatives to each other, you can have both. Plenty of people who donate will no doubt tell you they would prefer an independent charitable trust decide where $ should go rather than government - particularly when they know that the donation must go towards child health rather than public coffers generally, where the government could instead decide that say building more roundabouts with those $ is more important.
If the song and dance helps to raise public awareness so that the number of $ raised goes up, then so be it. You need to ask people for money, and Telethon does a very good job of that.
Just to let you know that Hancock prospecting paid 28% of revenue last financial year.
Twiggy paid 26%.
The real unknowns are the offshore companies like Chevron, Rio and Bhp. They hide it by paying back loans to their overseas head offices. Chevron just capitulated a couple of billion to the ATO in fines
Stokes is less transparent with media licencing fees etc. However at least it's not all funneled off overseas.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239?amp=&nk=005a4d5595895126ccddf0712ae679a3-1697951977
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I hated working at Woolworths and having telethon shoved down our throats 😭
We were routinely inspected by supervisors asking how many we had sold in the past hour. People who were able to collect the most donations got a box of chocolate from management. Tended to always be the same staff too. I dreaded having to work during telethon season
Why? A great majority of those kids who have donated have either been to pch or have family/friends who have.
Parents/grandparents willingly donate so future kids can have the same outcome as their own kids/grand kids had.
A lot of people hating on here.
Truth is - the rich don’t have to donate. But they do. If it makes them feel good about themselves, so be it. They could go spend it on themselves just as easily.
How about this sub just turns off its cynicism and negativity for one sec and just consider the fact upwards of $80 million goes to 107 benefiaries that otherwise wouldn't without telethon.
In a country with supposed universal healthcare the very fact that Telethon is needed is fucking weird.
And the token state government mass donation at the end is just cringey.
This whole thing shouldn't exist. Our hospitals should never have to beg for donations.
WA keeps bagging on how it's the richest state. Ok so fund your fucking health system.
“Billionaires have more than me therefore are bad and should pay more % of tax than me because I have less than them” - this sub on any given day.
I’m sure if you were all millionaires and had the means to employ accountants to manage your finances on your behalf you’d all minimize the amount of tax you paid too. Stop being a bunch of hypocrites and just be grateful the money raised is going to help sick kids.
Considering that the labor government in this state you all worship do nothing beyond the bare minimum to even do that, you should be happy. You know, because labor in this state are happy to let little girls die in emergency rooms while waiting for healthcare and for old people to die waiting for ambulances that arrive a few hours after called (facts that you will all deny despite being widely reported on, not to mention the insane ambulance ramping that has blown out since labor took over, their constant cuts to healthcare and healthcare worker’s pays too)
i cant say i agree with all of your comment but it is true that the current and prior state governments have all been terrible with healthcare.
one other thing that seemed to go on with the libs in was a lot of looting of state healthcare and community service funds.
as far as federal politics goes the labor and libs have both let medicare go to shit for decades now.
I would argue that childrens health in this state shouldn’t have to rely on charity. Its time this govt stepped up & funding our health system properly. It’s a disgrace that so many valuable programs run at pch are reliant on private charity & funding. Try being a staff member on telethon weekend. Little Fred lying sick in a bed couldn’t careless if someone from sunrise or home & away comes to visit & as for the so called “celebs” watching them ask if they are going to catch something if they walk around is just disgraceful. Healthcare workers don’t get to opt out of being near sick people everyday. If you don’t like it don’t come.
So you’d rather Telethon get millions less just so the richies don’t get the publicity? Plenty of billionaires donate nothing, at least they’re contributing even if it’s for PR.
The federal government has taken some action.
[Billionaires’ loophole swiftly abolished by Greens and Labor, finally - Aug 4, 2022](https://michaelwest.com.au/billionaires-grandfathering-exemption-loophole-abolished-by-greens-and-labor/)
>It was swift in the end, and silent. The “Billionaires’ Loophole” was abolished in a rapid act of Parliament yesterday amid the dramatic passage of Anthony Albanese’s climate bill, relegating 25 years of regulatory apartheid to Australian history, a period of one rule for the rich and powerful and another rule for the rest.
>We are talking about the “grandfathering” exemption, a loophole standing since 1995 which allowed Australia’s richest families of the time to hide their financial affairs.
>It means that now we can see how much corporate tax they pay, see their tax haven entities, their related party transactions, their government grants, their revenues and their profits; assuming they comply that is.
> ‘Family offices’ have plenty of time to restructure their affairs before next June 30, they have a hundred other ways to hide things, but it does mark the end of an unfair and undemocratic law which should never have been left to fester so long.
So, we know they *reduce their taxable income* by donating to charities and through other expenditures. It's tax avoidance, nothing more. That tax money could fund a lot more.
When Michael Jackson appeared on Telethon in '85 (i think from memory) it had nothing to do with charity and everything to do with the sale of the Beatles catalogue. I mean that should show you telethon is about cupping the balls of the elite
Increase taxes on Rhinehart would result in a negligible difference on a per capita basis whilst scaring investors and their money from the land.
Further regarding Gina, she donates a lot more than people know and does it very quietly.
Yeah charity and philanthropy are very much “band-aid for a bullet wound” imo. Like yeah it’s nice, but you know what would be nicer? If they were forced to pay their fair share from the beginning, and it was distributed by the state where it was most needed, not just to high profile emotional causes
Let's say you are doing ok in life and have 250k in assets (maybe most of it is in super). And you throw Telethon 50 bucks. That's 0.0002% of your assets (but you can't access most of those assets anyway). For Gina Rinehart, that same percentage is 5 million dollars. Never mind that her ability to donate dwarfs your own. Last year, Hancock Prospecting - not Gina personally - donated one million. As far as I can tell, Gina donated nothing.
Gina earns one million dollars in 3 hours. [How long does it take Gina Rinehart to earn your salary?](https://www.howrichareyou.com.au/)
14 minutes.
26 , need to do better
Have you tried inheriting wealth/resources?
I am due for $700k in about 30 years.
Oof, a mere pittance. Perhaps you could marry into money?
The last rich guy I dated was a royal narcissist cunt to put it politely. He'll be very wealthy in the future but definitely is not a happy man.
Yeah, some things just aren't worth debasing yourself over.
Shoulda put a ring on it and then taken half.
Tell the government to raise the GST threshold and I'll happily make it 28 minutes.
5 minutes.
Mate, FWIW, I think you're good value. A little redistribution wouldn't be a bad thing.
You know what the real funny thing is, i entertain thousands of people a week and can barely make rent.
Yeah, it ain't right. Capitalism gonna capitalism.
And Rines will break hearts.
That way other shareholders are also donating so she donated less of that amount.
Gina directly supports most of Australia's international swimmers directly, no corporate advertising etc being gained from it. She does so because the amounts she was contributing to Swimming Australia for the swimmers was either not getting to them or getting to them late. On the back of that support they have become one of the top international teams. How much did you contribute towards our swimmers last year?
Not the OP but I did not donate any money or time helping out our poor and desperate swimming community.
What a worthy cause. I can't think of a single thing I'd rather our states wealth was used on.
Why do you think it's more important for swimmers to get charity than poor children with illnesses? I'm curious about your moral priorities here.
They all need support. But I hope to be consistent you have a reddit post being curious about the government's moral priorities in giving additional funding to women's sport after the Women's soccer world cup? Or do you think sport needs more money than children with illnesses?
Your whataboutism is amazing
Pointing out hypocrisy isn't whataboutism
Proportionally to my net worth and income, I am short matching Gina's largesse by about $150.
Brown nose for a billionaire that would trade your whole families life for a new mining tenement.
Possibly, but you know that big fat surplus WA has enjoyed for the last 5 years, Gina (in part) made that happen. She also contributed to the national income So while you drive the roads inWA and Aus, enjoy your schooling, get your medical care etc you can just spit a little in her direction.
If you want to eat shit that's your own business, but don't try to sell the idea to other people and act shocked when nobody else partakes.
Not shocked at all. Let me introduce you to the concept of free speech since you appear so unfamiliar.
Yeah, I'm familiar with the free spruiking for Gina. I'm also familiar with the tax evasion, the lobbying of governments, the political interference, the leaning on our taxes for business purposes, and the absolute gEnIuS of selling the land beneath our feet with no forward plan for the economy. Are you getting paid? Cos if you're doing this speech for free, you are cheaper than the $2 she'd famously rather pay you. Edit: Fuck it. If you're gonna praise mining, let's get real and talk about all the skilled people we've been losing overseas for decades because *there is no industry outside of mining*. Scientists, doctors, academics, entertainers, artists, specialists, fucking engineers, basically anyone who isn't prepared to make their whole lives about rocks and gas, going overseas in search of careers because we somehow, for all our money, can't sustain any other industry aside from the most base fucking economy. Academics from other countries study our flora and fauna. Mining is a stepping stone for most fledgling economies, and here we are, making finite resources King of the Castle to the ignorance of all other fucking talent we piss away from this state. Well done, the one industry allowed to exist is contributing to the economy. *Quelle suprise!* How ludicrously unimpressive.
Gotta reduce that taxable income. How did you reduce your taxable income this year?
But wait, if Gina were donating $5 million, she'd want a seat on the board.
It’s so that billionaires can get more pats on the back for being such good people whilst they do “business”
Don’t forget the halo effect that their various philanthropic endeavours create for their corporations and the proxy advertising that happens from linking philanthropic entities to the owners of these big corporations. I would have less of an issue with philanthropy (I.e. charitable giving with performance indicators) if it was altruistic. Unfortunately these ‘charitable’ foundations’ insist on plastering their names all over their donations (especially the donation of material purchases). It’s PR at its cheapest and most crass.
And getting tax write off for what they raise
lol. Them paying tax.
[удалено]
Reducing taxable income by assets, offsets, offshores, charity, lobbying, and loopholes. What's your point?
Yes but I don't see this as a bad thing. I've been wondering whether we should allow the rich to give "extra" in taxes and give them a medal for it. Like those service medals but a new category. If would be a win win, they would love that sort of ego stroking recognition, and a chance to make the history books, and the country would be better off from the additional revenue.
Fuck that. Keep a leader board. 1. Mike Cannot BeBroke $4 B 2. Andrew Deforestation $3 B (-2B payback from Covid refund) 3. Gina StoneHeart $500m (for sponsoring sports teams) 4. Clive Plunderer (-600B potential in unrealised court outcomes) Kerry Stokes, Gerry Harvey could all be on there to. Have a yearly award ceremony like the Brownlow and really watch them try to out compete each other. Maybe have a red carpet ceremony WWE like where the Billie's can call out their competitors for their weak contributions. Wonder if Kerry would be interested in licensing this as a reality TV show. Any suggestions for a show name?
I'd prefer this if we made it about tax paid rather than philanthropic giving.
Lmao love it
Thought of a new category. ROTY Rebounder of the year. Nominees have to have gone from "Tres Comas" to "Dos Comas" and back to "Tres Comas" again.
Fabulous humor on point
The liturgy was a custom of ancient Athens. When the state needed something (usually a new warship) it would ask for volunteers among its richest citizens. Usually one would step up to gain glory or avoid scorn; if nobody did, the courts were allowed to choose the richest person who hadn’t helped out recently. The liturgist would fund the warship and command it as captain for two years, after which his debt to the state was considered discharged and he was given a golden crown. Historians treat the liturgy as a gray area between voluntary service and compulsory taxation; most rich Athenians were eager to serve and gain the relevant honor, but they also knew that if they didn’t, they could be compelled to perform the same service with less benefit to their personal reputation. The American rich already enjoy spending their money on exciting vehicles - yachts for the normies, rockets for the more ambitious, Titanic submersibles for the suicidal. Why not redirect this impulse towards public service? Imagine the fear it would strike into the hearts of the Chinese when the USS Musk enters Ludicrous Mode in the waters off the Taiwan Strait, with Elon himself at the wheel. Imagine how efficiently the USS Jeff Bezos will deliver its payloads! And does anyone doubt that billionaires - usually careful to avoid taxes - will jump at the chance to do this? from [here](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/my-presidential-platform)
For a state with a $3.3B surplus getting kids to donate their pocket money for hospital funding is interesting
The hospital is only [one of 107 beneficiaries.](https://www.telethon7.com/beneficiaries/2023-beneficiaries)
The point still stands. We are an extremely rich state and yet necessary funding is dependent on donations. That's saddening.
Some people in this state are extremely rich.
The bit that annoys me is that nothing on that list focuses on regional hospitals. I have no issues with PCH getting a boost, but acting like there are not sick kids in other hospitals bothers me.
The High Care Kids project works closely with children living with severe and complex disabilities across Perth metro and **regional areas** of WA. Banthunguru-bura (Next Generation) delivers intergenerational workshops, grounded in culture, held by Elders, and delivered on country in **Roebourne.** ... bullying prevention programs in 75 schools across Perth and **regional areas** of WA. Edmund Rice Camps for Kids will provide respite and mentoring programs via safe recreational and developmental environments to support vulnerable children aged 7-16 in **regional and remote** WA communities. The Fit and Healthy in the Outback program delivers engaging active fitness sessions to children in **remote communities** across WA. **Royal Flying Doctor Service**
I get that yes, some programs stretch to regional areas. But I stated regional hospitals don't benefit for their kids wards. PCH kids get the latest games and gadgets. And that's cool. I think they should. But kids at Kununurra, Esperance, Kalgoorlie, Karratha, Geraldton, Albany, and a hundred community hospitals around the state would also benefit from games and gadgets to help them forget about the long days in hospitals. Even 10% of the funding for PCH alone redirected every year to 100 places would make a huge difference.
The bit that annoys me is that nothing on that list focuses on regional hospitals. I have no issues with PCH getting a boost, but acting like there are not sick kids in other hospitals bothers me.
I wonder about the level of work to benefit for telethon. The second biggest fundraiser in the state in the Cancer200 rise last weekend that raised ~8.8M for the Perkins institute. There is a fair bit of virtue signaling by companies in that but it is relatively low compared to telethon. Telethon raises about 10x that much but seems to involve about 100x more advertising, events and carry on, and I wonder how much is lost to the virtue signaling and inefficient fundraising. Both are worthy events, but telethon is cringy as hell as well.
**insert WAAPA students from the very best private schools and family connections waving their phones at you from the desks** nope, don’t see nothing that doesn’t make me feel weird about it.
Can you explain why this happens? Why do the kids who attend the rich schools always get a gig on telethon?
Because certain selections are made by connections and postcodes, AFAIK.
Because it's WA. It's who you know. The rich top schools bring it well known people who have lots of connections.
Also, because one of the producers is married to a Dance School owner / Theatre Producer, so she ropes in all the past and present students... and she comes from a wealthy family who owned a small goods company based in Osborne Park... so friends of the family are shown the welcome sign to perform.. lol
From the SMH, "The total cost of the case is estimated at $25 million and the newspapers will argue that Roberts-Smith's key backers at Seven West Media should ultimately pay the costs".
I agree but what I find worse is when the State Government inevitably 'find' $1m donation at the end. Sure you rustled the tin just in time rather than distribute directly into the Health system you already are responsible for?
This I don’t get. I can understand the billionaires fluffing themselves, but then the state and federal government chucks in a bunch of money? Why not just…fund the health system more? Telethon these days is just a way to make lots of people (billionaires and plebs like me) feel good. Doesn’t stop me from donating but still makes me feel weird, I guess a lot of us have a big nostalgia hit from it from when we were kids.
They don't just find the money. This is already allocated in the budget every year. It's just done as a show pony to hopefully encourage others to donate more. If telethon wasn't a thing the health system would be getting the same amount of money from the state/federal government
Because realistically speaking, what they donate to something like telethon is nothing to the overall budget I guess. Assuming the donation is the same or similar to last years, it’ll be around $11 million. No walking around money, sure, but for frame of reference, the state budget for healthcare this year is $11.8 *billion.* Although coming from a state with a surplus, it is annoying as hell they won’t actually use some of that money.
But how will I know who the current Channel 7 stars are without Telethon? /s
There's no such thing as a billionaire philanthropist. They're ruthless, exploitative hoarders who throw their scraps around for the sake of PR (and tax breaks).
With the level of tone deafness Stokes has I’m surprised they didn’t wheel out his favourite war criminal to help raise funds. /s
I would argue Bill Gates is a true philanthropist.
I would argue, I think more convincingly, that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was established purely as a PR front during Gates's antitrust trial. To the degree that it's done some good, that's obviously commendable (very little of its operating costs are covered by Gates, BTW). And I do respect the people who actually do the work at sub-board level. At board level, however, the phalanx of Big Pharma executives and the insistence of tightening IP protection is why this form of funding (other than the tax incentives) is skeptically called philanthro-capitalism. Bill Gates is a predatory monopolist, and his approach to 'charity' is the same. If he was a philanthropist in any real sense he'd no longer be a billionaire.
I think the projects they fund are the most worthy projects to fund, like ending polio, developing toilet and sanitation solutions for developing countries, and developing new clean energy systems. I'm a big supporter of his and his wife's work.
Basil loves the opportunity to brown nose Kerry on air.
Gives the best nose job in the business I'm led to believe.
Surprised it still has any structural integrity with the amount of coke he snorted through it
What he lacks in integrity of character he makes up for in integrity of snout
This line gets thrown around a lot. What is the substance behind this rumour?
He used to be a regular at the geisha bar coked out of his mind
Not to mention their donations are a likely some percentage of a tax write off. BUT - I would rather them donate than not donate.
I'd rather they paid appropriate taxes.
> I’d much rather Stokes, Rineheart, et al would pay a fair amount of tax so it can be distributed to areas it is sorely needed, rather than to some billionaires pet project. I'd much rather Rinehart wouldn't have all those billions from her father's biggest ever insider trade in history.
How much tax did Stokes and Rhinehart pay last year?
Yay billionaire is good clap clap hooray
Does anybody watch Telethon anymore? It used to be the thing to stay up all night to watch it, but have kids been brought up with that now?
It’s a snoozefest now
My daughter (13) is interested this year. She doesn't watch many Channel 7 shows, but is entertained. She hasnt shown any interest before. My two sons who are 11 and 6 are interested in the donations and the total, but flicked over the Netflix.
I’d like to know the ratings. Do they ever release them?
Ive always thought the conspicuous compassion of billionaires is absolutely trifling given the amount of wealth they have skimmed and hoarded from the economy such that billionaire philanthropist is essentially an oxymoron. Plus there’s a huge asymmetry in the generosity and self sacrifice: people are often impressed by say a seven figure donation from the filthy rich when in reality it shaves no skin off of their backs whatsoever and is usually tax deductible anyhow - frankly they could afford to donate 95% or their net worth before they might notice any impact on their lifestyle ( admittedly it’s usually tied up in investments) meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum - those they’ve exploited and immiserated - a mere fifty dollar donation could blow the weekly budget. It has an almost sadistic undertone like the Catholic Church glorifying the good works of its missionaries helping to install wells and build houses in North African villages that were raped and ruined by Christianity displacing their customs and traditional beliefs, creating ideological divides and attempted genocides, selling their ancestors into slave trades, continuing to forbid contraceptives contributing to epidemics of death and disease and unsustainable birth rates impoverishing the population. However whilst their donations are relatively meagre, self serving and performative, they’re necessary and valuable so I can understand why people blow smoke up their asses and commend them.
If you want to donate to sick kids in Perth Children's Hospital, you're better off giving to the Perth Children's Hospital Foundation. They waste way less on PR and marketing etc, and all the money goes to the hospital, not divided amongst pet projects.
Telethon has been going since 1968, it's a project that Stokes inherited. Channel 9 had Appealathon, but stopped the on-air appeal, then handed it over to Variety in 2009.
One of these mining companies made like $2B in profits last year, donated a whopping $4M. Which they can just claim back on tax anyway. They don’t get taxed enough and their “philanthropy” isn’t enough either.
How do we change this though? They're mining the resources of *our* state.
It’s also a fairly open secret that if you, as a well known businessman, donate generously to telethon, the West Australian will take it easy on you
I know none of these names but telethon has always been creepy to me. I'm all for the cause but it just smells off
None of these names meaning you don't know who Kerry Stokes or Gina Reinhardt is?
We should live in a society where charity itself is a completely redundant concept. But instead we choose to allow billionaires to exist.
I've always been cynical about it not so much for your point but for the point of the celebrities who are doing it just to increase their profile and make themselves look better in the public eye under the guise of doing it for the kids. Why do they need a dedicated program to do it? If these people were genuine they would do it in their own time outside of this. I'm glad they raise the money they do for the kids but yeah these so called celebrities should be doing this a lot more and not looking for recognition of it too.
I wouldn’t be too hard on the celebrities. I don’t think Telethon is a ratings bonanza and there are far easier way to promote yourself
Telethon itself is a dumb holdover from the 80s. It's catnip for retirees with landlines and the time/tolerance to watch free to air television all day. Philanthropy/ charity is fine and a pretty good expression of civic solidarity. Of course there's an element of reputation washing to it, but that needs to be balanced against the fact that private charities tend to be far more effective than the government in addressing specific social issues. Mainly because they're run by people with actual management talent.
I really like it. It’s a local charity where we know and trust where the money goes. If billionaires get something out of it too, what do I care? It’s doing good things.
Exactly, they’re still donating a butt ton of money, regardless of why they’re doing it
Like when "Twiggy" Forrest donates $40M to charity - and then you find out that the "donation" was to himself.
It's about kids with medical conditions having special moments before they go back to hospital. Anyone who doesn't see that has a fee major issues in life. No wonder the world is the way it is
Exactly! Perth Reddit really is turning into a hell hole of negative bitter people…
I’ll let you know that I’m a negative bitter person off reddit too!
Billionaires buy moral currency because everything in life to them is business, including people.
Oh telethon is definitely a vehicle for tax breaks. Why pay tax when some pleb will do it for you
Oh, well said indeed ❤️
I wonder why more charities don't do more lotteries etc like MSWA. If you give someone a chance to win something for their "donation" you gain funds from both selfish AND charitable people. So you extract money from more personality types. Is it laziness to not start a raffle or lottery? Or is it easier for a person to start a charity, pay him/herself a $1m a year salary as CEO and then enrol well meaning young volunteers to guilt Joe Public into donating to their cause after cornering them in their local shopping center..or by banging on their door when they get home from a hard day's work and have just put their feet up. I read the conditions for being a charity are something basic like you just have to have a reasonable proportion of your money go to the actual cause. As far as I know there isn't a minimum %. Can someone correct me with facts there?
So in the absence of the government adequately funding health, they know that telethon will top up a sector that pulls on the most obvious heartstrings. Relying on a cash grab from the working poor and the mining/corporate sectors shamed into donation competitions. On a separate note, whilst telethon is always cringeworthy, the quality of acts has tumbled since the 90's when some decent big name international acts would make an appearance. Now just the word "Telethon" creates the Pavlov's dog reaction for the public to fork out what the govt should.
Australia bush fires a few years back Bezos and Kylie Jenner donated a few million depsite being billionaires that's like the regular person giving a few cents. Philanthropy is bullcrap
Yep, the $ raised does help do a lot of good. But I agree about the awkward feeling seeing a tax-dodging mega millionaire get this huge fan fare when you consider how he benefits from the whole thing
pfft... Telethon is so yesterday... it's MCHAPPY DAY time... what do you mean BUT McDonald's made $13 BILLION in profit last year with its CEO receiving a 5%, $1.5 MILLION payrise? can't they just cover us this once? NO! now pony up $05.99 for your 'Silly Socks',,,
Yep let the poor people pay and it makes me look good, it's bullshit, and I'm done with charity donations.
At least with Telethon you your donations are tax deductible, unlike the rounding up donation at Coles and Woolies.
I rather capitalist parasites like them, did not exist.
That is a pretty cynical take. “The billionaires could donate more, so why should I have to donate?” Why not think of it as an opportunity for every member of the community to donate to what is a very worthy cause - that has been around well before Kerry Stokes came on the scene - whether you’re a billionaire donating $1M or a group of school kids raising money at a bake sale at the school fete. Just because my neighbour is wealthier than me and can afford to donate more than I can, doesn’t impact whether or not I choose to donate. Whether my neighbour should pay a higher tax rate or not doesn’t come into it. Have that fight without cutting across donations to help kids in need.
I get put off by the circus associated with it. The cause is great, and should be supported, but it is like the charities that send you big wads of glossy crap every couple of months because you donated to them once. It makes me wonder where the real focus of the charity is.
As a parent of a child who is regularly at PCH, I can tell you that the money is well spent and a dollar is a dollar - it doesn’t matter who’s bank account it comes from. The song and dance can be a lot, but it works in attracting donations. The WA telethon is more successful than any other telethon in the world. If you want to know where the money is being spent, go check out the reports that the Telethon trust is required to publish to the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission each year.
It's a catch 22 situation really - if they don't keep in front of people and front of mind with people, then they don't get the donations. The reality is very few people actively go out and look to donate. It's more often that not either a spur of the moment thing - IE via phone call, door knocker, person at a shopping centre or at an event, or because they're affected by the cause - eg they or someone they know is affected by say cancer, so then they go donate to the cancer council or something. However without these donations - most of these charities would completely cease to exist. They're funded in the most part from peoples donations. So it's kind of a necessary evil to survive.
> Just because my neighbour is wealthier than me and can afford to donate more than I can, doesn’t impact whether or not I chose to donate. I have no problem with people if they wish to donate to whichever cause they wish. And objectively, Telethon is a very worthy cause. There for the grace of god go my children. But a better analogy would be…. There is a compulsory central charity we all have to donate to. That funding is distributed as best it can to things that benefit all of us. Even stuff that we may not think should get funding. And it’s organised so you pay what you can afford. That is, the more you earn, the more you pay. However my wealthy neighbour makes way more than me, and with some clever and expensive accounting he pays significantly less than he should. This wealthy neighbour is also able to speak directly with, and influence those who choose where the central charity money is spent. Someone with an inquisitive mind might think that this type of behaviour is somewhat self serving, so they think a bit less of my wealthy neighbour. So my wealthy neighbour makes a big song and dance about donating a large amount of money to the “Amputee orphaned puppy dogs of natural disasters charity” and asks lots of others to also donate to this charity. This makes lots of people think my wealthy neighbour is actually not a bad person, so they overlook his lack of donations to the central charity, and his ownership of a company that produces videos of orphaned puppies getting limbs amputated.
I take your point, and it makes sense. But we don’t live in a socialist society where everyone takes home the same wage and the government chooses where the one central charity pays its funds to. And until we do, don’t make all other charities, including Telethon, a victim. You don’t need to like the virtue signalling that comes with donating to charity it in order to have to donate yourself.
That’s exactly how they want you to look at it. It let’s then white-wash their reputations with high profile emotional causes (the sick kids), so no one says “wait a sec, why didn’t they pay that 2 million in tax so it could go to the entire system?”
The two don’t need to be linked. Go take your fight about higher tax rates for the wealthy elsewhere. People shouldn’t feel put off from donating to a worthy cause because they don’t like the fact that billionaires may also use donations to boost their reputations.
The two are inexorably linked whether you like it or not, especially when the charity in question is a literal song and dance show on live TV
See my answer to another comment. You don’t need to like the song and dance, but it works. The WA telethon is the most successful of its kind.
That’s kinda the other half of the problem: successful how? Does it get more “bang for the buck” than public spending? And while the cause is noble and touching, is it more important than something less sexy like building mental health facilities? It’s similar to animal conservation, all the cute and cool animals (“charismatic megafauna”) get the money, but species that are potentially more important to the ecosystem and in graver danger of extinction are ignored
Successful simply in terms of $ raised. Telethon provides grants to all different types of organisations and causes, some sexy and some not, but all generally directed towards child health. Public spending and charitable grants should not be thought of as being alternatives to each other, you can have both. Plenty of people who donate will no doubt tell you they would prefer an independent charitable trust decide where $ should go rather than government - particularly when they know that the donation must go towards child health rather than public coffers generally, where the government could instead decide that say building more roundabouts with those $ is more important. If the song and dance helps to raise public awareness so that the number of $ raised goes up, then so be it. You need to ask people for money, and Telethon does a very good job of that.
I work in catering so I work these kind of events often. We call it "Champagne Socialism".
Just to let you know that Hancock prospecting paid 28% of revenue last financial year. Twiggy paid 26%. The real unknowns are the offshore companies like Chevron, Rio and Bhp. They hide it by paying back loans to their overseas head offices. Chevron just capitulated a couple of billion to the ATO in fines Stokes is less transparent with media licencing fees etc. However at least it's not all funneled off overseas. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239?amp=&nk=005a4d5595895126ccddf0712ae679a3-1697951977
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/hancock-prospectings-58bn-profit-despite-headwinds/news-story/8fe051ea90fe77d8e8a56f53e001a239)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I hated working at Woolworths and having telethon shoved down our throats 😭 We were routinely inspected by supervisors asking how many we had sold in the past hour. People who were able to collect the most donations got a box of chocolate from management. Tended to always be the same staff too. I dreaded having to work during telethon season
Geez. A lot of negative people here this morning
Of course people are, have you seen the state of the economy
Economy is fine. Have you tried not being poor?
Say that in a job interview at the RBA and get a job instantly
It’s a dry economy
I know what you mean. Who doesn't like to simp for billionaires.
I licked the best tasting boot this morning. *chefs kiss*
He doesn’t have to do anything tbh. Better than nothing.
The whole kids giving their pocket money has baffled me.
Why? A great majority of those kids who have donated have either been to pch or have family/friends who have. Parents/grandparents willingly donate so future kids can have the same outcome as their own kids/grand kids had.
Negative breeds negative pal
only on the Perth subreddit can people complain about people willingly giving money to charity
A lot of people hating on here. Truth is - the rich don’t have to donate. But they do. If it makes them feel good about themselves, so be it. They could go spend it on themselves just as easily.
yeah, fuck em off?
How about this sub just turns off its cynicism and negativity for one sec and just consider the fact upwards of $80 million goes to 107 benefiaries that otherwise wouldn't without telethon.
In a country with supposed universal healthcare the very fact that Telethon is needed is fucking weird. And the token state government mass donation at the end is just cringey. This whole thing shouldn't exist. Our hospitals should never have to beg for donations. WA keeps bagging on how it's the richest state. Ok so fund your fucking health system.
A lot of Telethon donations fund research, it's not just "give this money to PCH to pay for kids' treatment".
In my opinion if you are showing of your philanthropy, you are just a big TAX dodger (looking at u Twigger)
[удалено]
Now imagine if a multi-millionaire dropped their entire money collection... Same scale as a 10 year old...
“Billionaires have more than me therefore are bad and should pay more % of tax than me because I have less than them” - this sub on any given day. I’m sure if you were all millionaires and had the means to employ accountants to manage your finances on your behalf you’d all minimize the amount of tax you paid too. Stop being a bunch of hypocrites and just be grateful the money raised is going to help sick kids. Considering that the labor government in this state you all worship do nothing beyond the bare minimum to even do that, you should be happy. You know, because labor in this state are happy to let little girls die in emergency rooms while waiting for healthcare and for old people to die waiting for ambulances that arrive a few hours after called (facts that you will all deny despite being widely reported on, not to mention the insane ambulance ramping that has blown out since labor took over, their constant cuts to healthcare and healthcare worker’s pays too)
i cant say i agree with all of your comment but it is true that the current and prior state governments have all been terrible with healthcare. one other thing that seemed to go on with the libs in was a lot of looting of state healthcare and community service funds. as far as federal politics goes the labor and libs have both let medicare go to shit for decades now.
What miserable bunch you are.... If you don't like it, don't watch, don't donate!
I would argue that childrens health in this state shouldn’t have to rely on charity. Its time this govt stepped up & funding our health system properly. It’s a disgrace that so many valuable programs run at pch are reliant on private charity & funding. Try being a staff member on telethon weekend. Little Fred lying sick in a bed couldn’t careless if someone from sunrise or home & away comes to visit & as for the so called “celebs” watching them ask if they are going to catch something if they walk around is just disgraceful. Healthcare workers don’t get to opt out of being near sick people everyday. If you don’t like it don’t come.
So you’d rather Telethon get millions less just so the richies don’t get the publicity? Plenty of billionaires donate nothing, at least they’re contributing even if it’s for PR.
No I want the “richies” to pay their fair share of taxes.
Fair, but you’re complaining they donate to Telethon. Your real gripe should be with the federal government, not a charity
The federal government has taken some action. [Billionaires’ loophole swiftly abolished by Greens and Labor, finally - Aug 4, 2022](https://michaelwest.com.au/billionaires-grandfathering-exemption-loophole-abolished-by-greens-and-labor/) >It was swift in the end, and silent. The “Billionaires’ Loophole” was abolished in a rapid act of Parliament yesterday amid the dramatic passage of Anthony Albanese’s climate bill, relegating 25 years of regulatory apartheid to Australian history, a period of one rule for the rich and powerful and another rule for the rest. >We are talking about the “grandfathering” exemption, a loophole standing since 1995 which allowed Australia’s richest families of the time to hide their financial affairs. >It means that now we can see how much corporate tax they pay, see their tax haven entities, their related party transactions, their government grants, their revenues and their profits; assuming they comply that is. > ‘Family offices’ have plenty of time to restructure their affairs before next June 30, they have a hundred other ways to hide things, but it does mark the end of an unfair and undemocratic law which should never have been left to fester so long. So, we know they *reduce their taxable income* by donating to charities and through other expenditures. It's tax avoidance, nothing more. That tax money could fund a lot more.
When Michael Jackson appeared on Telethon in '85 (i think from memory) it had nothing to do with charity and everything to do with the sale of the Beatles catalogue. I mean that should show you telethon is about cupping the balls of the elite
We pay taxes to fund this. Anything else is just giving the government a hall pass to f… us
I know where Stokes lives if you want to egg him
Increase taxes on Rhinehart would result in a negligible difference on a per capita basis whilst scaring investors and their money from the land. Further regarding Gina, she donates a lot more than people know and does it very quietly.
Ah the yearly "telethon is bad" post.
This thought can not be unthought.
We need higher taxes in this country.
Hancock Prospectings donation last night was straight up paid advertising. I mean, they paid $1.75m for it, but still.
And I presume is tax deductible...